hello. i'm wolf blitzer. it's 1:00 p.m. here in washington. 8:00 p.m. in baghdad. wrmp you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. let's cue the clock. showing just under 41 days until the u.s. presidential election, and while we're watching the candidate out there on the campaign trail, we also have eyes on capitol hill here in washington where the u.s. senate has just voted to override president obama's veto of a 9/11 bill. the house votes in a couple of hours as well, and if they go the same way as almost certainly will be the case, it will mark the first time they've reject add veto from president obama. much more on that in just a
moment. first, let's get back to the presidential race. in just over an hour from now, hillary clinton will take the stage in new hampshire with senator bernie sanders by her side. it's their first joint appearance since his formal endorsement more than two months ago. hillary clinton is also getting help on the campaign trail dpra daughter chelsea in north carolina and first lady michelle obama who headlined a clinton rally in philadelphia last hour. i want all of you, all of us, to listen to a bit of what she said. >> experience matters. preparation matters. temperament matters. and hillary clinton has it all. she's the real deal. i have come to know her very well over the years, and i know that she is more than ready, more than able to be an outstanding president. for all of us. so -- we cannot afford to squander this opportunity.
particularly given the alternative. because we know that being president isn't anything like reality tv. it is not an apprenticeship, and it is not just about fiery speeches or insulting tweets. it's about whether someone can handle the awesome responsibility of leading this country. so as you prepare to make this decision, i urge you to ignore the chatter and the noise, and ask yourselves which candidate really has the experience, the maturity, the temperament to handle this job. which candidate's words and actions speak to the like inclu opportunity, sacrifice for others. because your answers to these questions on election day will determine who sits in the oval office after barack obama.
and let's be clear -- elections aren't just about who votes, but who doesn't vote. and that is especially true for young people like all of you. in fact, in 2012, voters under the age of 30 -- yeah, to you all -- that is not me. you provided the margin of victory for barack in four key battleground states, florida, ohio, virginia, and right here in pennsylvania. you all did it. but hear this -- without those votes, barack would have lost those states, we would have lost the election, period, end of story. and for any of you who might be thinking that your one vote doesn't really matter, or that one person can't really make a difference, consider this -- back in 2012, barack won
pennsylvania by about 300,000 votes, which sounds like a lot. but, see, when you break that number down, the difference between winning and losing the state was only 17 votes per precinct. take that in. 17 votes. that's how presidential elections are won and lost. on 5 votes, 17 votes, per precinct. so the fact is that each of you here in this auditorium, in this special place, we're in a gym. right? got confused! but each of you could swing an entire precinct and win this election for hill are yary just getting yourselves, your friends, your family out to vote. that's all you have to do. that's it. you can do it. you have the power. >> the first lady isn't just out there on the campaign trail for hillary clinton. she's also starring in a brand
new ad for her. let's listen. >> hillary will be a president our kids can look up to, a president who believes in our kids and will fight for them every day. that's why i believe in her. >> let's bring in our panel, our senior political reporter as well as mark preston executive editor for cnn politics. mark, how powerful is this argument of hillary clinton as a good role model, especially when it comes to female voters? >> well, certainly coming from the lips of michelle obama, it becomes very powerful, specifically when you're looking at the african-american vote. now, this is a subset of voters that donald trump has been trying to make in-roads with. the question is, you know, hillary clinton is going to get, you know, upwards of, you know, 90% to 9 05% of the vote. what is the actual number?
she needs the numbers. michelle obama is most beloved, having her on the stump is powerful specifically in a state like philadelphia. >> and the first lady also bringing up the birther issue. the birther attacks on her husband. of course, we know for, known for years until recently donald trump was advancing that whole birther notion, very clear. she was talking about donald trump when she said this -- >> and then, of course, there are those who questioned and continue to question for the past eight years, whether my husband was even born in this country. and let me say, hurtful, deceitful questions, deliberately designed to undermine his presidency. questions that cannot be blamed on others or swept under the rug by a sentence uttered at a press conference. >> insincere sentence she's talking about, referring
obviously to what donald trump said last week. >> yes. very specific. i mean, this is a clearly personal thing for the obama family, personal, certainly, for michelle obama. and very surprising, i think, direct attack on donald trump in some ways. never really mentions his name in that speech, but clearly i think underscoring what we've heard from hillary rodham clinton on this as well. and they don't want this to go away. they think that the birther controversy, that donald trump does want to go away, they think it's motivationalable, because it prove to some people that donald trump is willing to play these games and some people call it a racist conspiracy theory to advance his political ajend d and that's worrisome to a lot of people. that's why she went there, i think she'll continue to go there on this and as will hillary clinton. they don't want him moving away from this controversy. >> and rallies the democratic base and helps hillary clinton get that barack obama coalition
back on track, which got him elected twice. >> and not just african-americans. suburban women, college kids as well. a lot of those folks. michelle obama, this month, on the cover of "essence" and "instyle" magazine, very much a role model and well-respected figure to a white variety of voters and that's whyte why you'll see her on the campaign trail often and different from before. she was always the reluctant campaigner. reluctant to campaign for people whose last name wasn't obama. here she is lending her is a nort a major way to hillary clinton. >> mark preston, the whole issue of donald trump threatening to bring up the whole bill clinton infidelities. said he held back because of respect for chelsea clinton. chelsea clinton sout with an interview in "cos ma paul toult
saying a distraction from his ability to talk about what's actually at stake in this election. what about directly making that comment? >> she's a mother, the fact of the matter is, donald trump says he wasn't -- he praised himself, wolf, for not bringing it up. but the fact of the matter is, he did bring it up by saying it. so the -- so it is out there now. so you know, where this is going to hurt him, if donald trump continues to pursue this at this point, hurt him with suburban women, because what we've seen in the past is that when this issue comes up, hillary clinton looks like a victim, as she is, based upon the infidelity of her husband. this is not a winning strategy right now for donald trump. everybody knows the clintons' past. he needs a different strategy. perhaps focus on policies and where he can undercut her, foreign policy or attack on
benghazi, points still explosive. >> he's threatening in the second presidential debate not to be as nice as he was in the first one. >> a risky strategy. this is going to be a town hall. right? anderson cooper a moderate around people will look to see how he engages with the folk there's in that audience. you better believe that whatever donald trump shows up, if he has this approach in terms of mentioning hillary clinton's husband, she's ready for this attack. i mean, he has telegraphed it, almost said he plans to bring it up. she'll be ready for it and, again, mark is exactly right. hillary clinton was never more popular, her approval ratings in the 60s in the middle of that monica lewinsky scandal. if she's painted -- if he brings it up she's seen as a victim and, again it will turn off a lot of women, particularly, and those are the demographic group that donald trump is most vulnerable with. >> and we'll see bernie sanders campaigning with hillary clinton shortly. this is very significant in
terms of getting that coalition back on track. >> yeah. the coalition, you know, basically millennial voters, right, where hillary clinton is having problems, having problems with young african-americans as well, but bernie sanders, you can imagine a gentleman, a senator who's a little quirky in his 70s was able to get this energy, this young energy to get behind his candidacy. he's also really got the left, you know? he had -- you know, this, this support that hillary clinton has been unable to get, because he was concerned that she was too tied to wall street and the fact of the matter, bernie sanders on the campaign trail says something. sending a very strong message you have to get out and vote in november for hillary clinton. even though he lost to her and did say harsh things about her during the primary, she's the better candidate, in his eyes. >> mark preston, nia, thanks very much. coming up, a first for president obama. the senate overwhelmingly votes
to override his veto of a bill giving 9/11 family as way to sue saudi arabia. the house will vote later this afternoon. a republican congressman peter king of new york standing by to join us live. we'll discuss this and much more right after a quick break. you pay your car insurance premium like clockwork.
if you have liberty mutual deductible fund™, you could pay no deductible at all. sign up to immediately lower your deductible by $100. and keep lowering it $100 annually, until it's gone. then continue to earn that $100 every year. there's no limit to how much you can earn and this saving applies to every vehicle on your policy. call to learn more. switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
back to the breaking news now. moments ago the u.s. senate voted to override president obama's veto of a 9/11 bill by a vote of 97-1. if the house of representatives agrees in a vote later today as fully expected, it will be the first time the u.s. congress and house and senate, they have rejected a veto from president obama's desk. it's called the justice against sponsors of terrorism act. the main point of disagreement was the inclusion of the provision that will allow families of 9/11 victims to sue the government of saudi arabia over the attacks. it also allows federal courts to impose liability on people involved in international terror attacks against u.s. nationals. joining us from capitol hill is new york republican congressman peter king. congressman, thanks very much for joining us. i know you -- you support overriding the veto. you believe it will happen. also in the house of
representatives, but you also know the president and his top national security advisers are warning a very severe national security consequences for the united states. do you not take that worry into consideration? >> well, wolf, i am the prime sponsor of this bill in the house. i've worked on this now for four, five, six years, and, no. we've taken all of this into account. the fact is all we are doing is closing a loophole in the law. the way the law currently is, and this involve sovereign immunity a terrorist government carries out a terrorist attack here in the united states, planned it and carried it out that they could be sued. the court in new york, though, unfortunately in this case, said because it was planned overseas if there was saudi involvement overseas they couldn't be sued. we're saying no matter where the attack is planned, overseas or here in the united states that a lawsuit can be brought. this is a, a common exception to sovereign immunity.
you can always sue in a terrorist act. this clarifies, the weapon put together in the u.s., planning doesn't have to be u.s. exact result on military does not involve acts of war. talking about state sponsors of terrorism. government-sponsored terrorism is the only time these lawsuits can be brought and these 9/11 families are entitled to this, deserve it, if saudis were not involved they have nothing to worry about. >> because as recently it's a a couple hours ago the director of the cia john renin issued a tough statement. let me read a settens from that statement. if we fail to uphold this standard, sovereign immunity we place our other officials in danger. no country who more to lose underlining that principle than the united states and few would be in greater danger than the cia. should take into account the associated risks to our national
security. his spoipoint is cia, u.s. mili personnel, american diplomats serving overseas. say the u.s. has a drone strike that ill cans civilians, all of a sudden can be arrested and charged? >> i strongly disagree with director brennan. took all that into account in the legislation. aways exceptions talking about a state sponsored attack of international terrorism. none of those instances come under that category. >> congressman, a lot of these countries would consider a drone strike that kills civilians a state-sponsor of terrorism, namely the united states sponsored that drone strike and with u.s. officials, the president, head of the cia, secretary of defense, working overseas? >> wrong. there are always exceptions to sovereign immunity. these countries could have brought lawsuits against us all
along and could bring them against us right now. all we're doing is closing one loophole. the way the law currently is we can sue foreign governments if they were involved in carrying it out here in the united states themselves. a contour shis act occurred here in this country. no, it's not right. this is so bipartisan. senator john cornyn, top republican, senator chuck schumer here in the house, myself, republican, liberal democrats coming together. the chairman of the judiciary committee, worked long hours to get the language just right. our military, our diplomats, nothing in this legislation is going to increase their potential liability. now if other governments want to sue, they can sue anyway, if they want. that's the way your justice department is to protect us against those lawsuits. they could bring lawsuits now if they wanted to but aren't going to get anywhere. >> congressman, stand by. other news is coming in, an
update on the new york/new jersey bombings. investigators say the men seen here, look at these images, removed a pressure cooker bomb from a bag in new york city. that bomb did not go off, but two others did. one of them injuring 29 people in manhattan. development comes as the father of the accused bomber ahmad rahami believes his son carried the attack out himself. >> he do himself by self, did everything by self. order online. one time my grandson went to his room, cleaning it, he's 4 years old. >> for the latest, bring in our justice department evan perez. two naen gmen that got the suit left the bomb, took the suitcase? >> officials tracked down who these two men now are, identified them. able to using surveillance and
other methods able to track them to a hotel in man hat wrn they were staying. visiting new york as tourists from overseas from outside united states and now believed to be back outside the united states. they're not in the united states. this is why it was widely believed they not stepped forward, not come forward to say they were the two men seen on camera, on the surveillance cameras there. we now know that the fbi is working to try to talk to them, interview them. they want this bag back. they still do not believe these two men played any role in the bombings. they simply were walking by and they saw these bags and picked them up and took it with them. at this point, the fbi wants to talk to them, see where they went with this bag and most of all they want the bag back so they can continue their investigative work. >> because that bag might have a lot of evidence, fingerprints, for example, dna. where the bag was purchased. we can show the image of that bag. a very distinct kind of
suitcase, if you will. that is critically important in this investigation, to help determine if rahami acted alone or had accomplices. >> exactly. they can determine a lot of things from getting the bag. see where it was bought, try to see if there's other people's fingerprints. at this point, obviously, if shipped overseas, handled by baggage handlers for an airline, there might be additional fingerprints as well that would show up but certainly it would be very much something that the fbi wants to get ahold of, making sure they interview these men, that they get the bag back, and continue the investigative work to see if anybody else was involved in this. >> critically important information. good reporting. stand by. i want to bring back congressman peter king, member of the house homeland security committee and member of the intelligence committee as well. what can you tell us about these two men? >> yeah, well, again, i do know from talking to people involved in the investigation, back even into last week, there are some people who think those two may
still have involvement. others think they're not. i know people who watched that video and all of the videos, really there's other video, too, from further down the block, they have reason to believe those two were involved. others convinced they weren't. this has to continue. it's important to track those two down and it raises questions why they didn't acknowledge who they were, why they didn't cooperate, if they had no involvement, why didn't th cooperate? maybe scared, in a foreign country and being held. again, there are questions. i hope the fbi tracks them down and does talk to them. i'm not certain what country they came from nap also could be significant. >> could be significant meaning if they came from europe or south america or africa or the middle east, for example. >> yeah. if they came from a country way strong terrorist component and particular city, would raise specific questions.
i don't want to prejudge this at all only the fact this is a lead i'll again pleased the fbi is tracking down, and i know they'll do the very best they can. >> identified these two individuals, out of the country, and now hoping to track down these two men and interview them, find out most importantly the whereabouts of that bag. very, very important bag. the fbi's under fire, as you know, for not knowing more about this based on previous reports on rahami. was there a failure here? because you know, he did travel overseas, spent almost a year in pakistan. not just in pakistan, in quetta a hot bed of taliban activity, for example. was there a failure? >> i don't know if i'd call it a failure, but certainly a gap. seen it in orlando, in san bernardino, in boston, where the fbi does, get an inquiry, does do an investigation does not find enough evidence and then drops it. i think that what we have to do
is realize that there's not enough fbi agents in the world to carry on open-ended investigations, but at that time when they decide not to go further, it should be turned over to the local police or the guidelines changed to allow the fbi to keep these investigations open for longer periods of time to again turn it over maybe to the local police, but continue to have the local police work with the joint terrorism taskforce and the fbi. i think the guidelines may be too strict on what the fbi is allowed to do. i discussed this with director comey. only i think 35,000 fbi agents nationwide. 35,000 cops in new york city alone. in cases like this, where there may be smoke but can't find the fire, again, advise the local police, give them the information you have. they can track down leads, keep their eyes and ears open. it's important to do that. again, this is the fourth time we're aware of, just in the last several years where an attack has occurred from some fight carried out by someone who was under fbi investigation. >> quick question on cyber
security. do you believe russians are involved in these cyber attacks on the democratic national committee, for example, efforts to perhaps deal with elections here in the united states? >> again from what i've seen, i do believe there is russian involvement, and i do believe that they are, if anything, they're trying to disrupt confidence in the election. take away confidence in the election. going back to the 1940s, the soviets then and now the russians, you know, do try to disrupt elections. this is nothing new, but again with the advent of cyber technology being as intrusive as it is we have to be more careful. i don't believe there's any way they can affect the vote but put a cloud over the final outcome of the election that creates enough instances which will get public attention and then put a, a cloud of doubt over the final results. >> peter king, thanks so much
for joining us. >> wolf, thank you. a team of international prosecutors says a russian-made missile downed malaysia flight 17 over eastern ukraine back in july of 2014. the dutch-led team says the missile was brought in from russia fired from a village under the control of pro-russian spre separatists. 298 people onboard died. the ukraine foreign mince sister says it pointed to russia but russia repeatedly denied any involvement in the attack rejected the report calling it "biased and politically motivated." the russian spokesman for the ministry of defense says none of its missile ever crossed the ukrainian border and asserts all information presented is based on only two sources. the internet and recranian security services. prosecutors are gathering evidence now for a potential criminal trial. coming up, the pentagon announcing at least 500 more u.s. troops will be heading to
iraq. we'll take you live to baghdad. we have new information coming in right after this. is that ice-t? nope, it's lemonade. is that ice-t? lemonade. ice-t? what's with these people, man? lemonade, read the sign. lemonade. read it. ok. delicious. ice-t at a lemonade stand? surprising. what's not surprising? how much money marin saved by switching to geico.
the united states and iraq agreed on a new plan to send at least 500 more additional u.s. troops to iraq. the number of u.s. troops in iraq has been rising steadily since june of 2014. the latest increase would bring troop levels up to around 5,000 troops in iraq alone. our senior international correspondent ben wedeman join us live from baghdad. ben what additional, what will these additional u.s. troops were doing and how soon could
they be deployed? >> reporter: well, they could be deployed farrelly soon, wolf, and we understand from the prime minister's office here that they will be strictly involved with training and advising iraqi troops in the area around mosul. the point is to reinforce the american presence as iraq prepares for that offensive, but when it's going to happen, most people are working on the assumption it will be sometime in october, but a precise date is still not clear. at the moment, the iraqi forces are busy trying to clear some of the villages and towns around mosul, and the other day we went and met a woman who's been taking part in some of those battles. >> [ speaking in foreign language ]. >> reporter: this woman counts the times her house has been blown up.
2006, 2009, 2010. three cars in 2013, and 2014, she says. describing herself as a housewife, she is better known otherwise took up arms and leads men into blgts battle against isis and al qaeda before that. [ speaking in foreign language ] six times they tried to assassinate me, se shez, i have shr shrapnel my head and legs but all that didn't stop me from fighting. [ speaking in foreign language ] her first and second husbands were killed in action, and isis killed her father and three brothers. this justifies, she says, the following. [ speaking in foreign language ] i fought them, she tells me, receiving to isis. i beheaded them. i cooked their heads. i burned their bodies.
grisly photos from her facebook page bear out her words. her men showed me the machete they say they use. the general heads combat praxs in suthe province. this is his explanation. she lost her brothers and husbands as martyrs he says, so out of revenge she formed her own force. last week she and her men took part in the battle to drive isis out of her native area. all isis left behind was boobytraps and a few dead bodies. many of the residents stayed put, or like this woman, joined the fighting. these boys recount the travails in life under isis. [ speaking in foreign language ] there was no food, no school, nothing, says one. they ruined us. [ speaking in foreign language ] if we lose iraq again, says this
boy, we'll lose it forever. in ways both tangible and intangible, this ravaged land has already lost its self. and also this woman will take part in the offensive to liberate mosul with her tribal gunmen, and they will be in proximity with those american forces who will be advising and training iraqis. wolf? >> ben wedeman in baghdad for us. ben, thank you very much. up next, discussing the new u.s. troop levels in iraq and the war against isis with u.s. congressman and u.s. marine corps veteran walking in now. congressman, thanks for joining us. we'll discuss in just a moment. . dad,
i wish they would've let us help. but, it did make me think, though. about what? well, that i could leave you in the same situation. i don't have life insurance, either. if something were to happen to me tomorrow, how are you pay for my funeral? or my other bills? nothing's gonna happen to you tomorrow. you don't know that. i made a promise to always take care of you kids. without life insurance, i'm not keeping it. besides, i already looked into it and between my budget and health, well ... you should call massmutual. they have a new policy called guaranteed acceptance life insurance. i got covered with one call, and it was an affordable option for reliable coverage. what do you think, mom? i think it's time to make sure i keep that promise. if you're age 50-75, it's easier than ever to get reliable coverage at an affordable price. call massmutual today for guaranteed acceptance life insurance. with no medical questions or exams,
you cannot be turned down. with one phone call, you can get coverage ranging from $2,000-$25,000, and premiums can start at less than $10 per month. guaranteed acceptance life insurance can help your loved ones cover expenses such as funeral costs, remaining medical expenses and credit card bills. we have several payment options, and benefits are paid quickly and directly to your beneficiaries. they can use it for any expense they choose. for more than 160 years, our policyowners have mattered most to us. massmutual's ratings are among the highest of any company in any industry. you can feel confident we can help you protect the people who matter most to you with guaranteed acceptance life insurance. call massmutual today at this number. call now! gives you better taste and better nutrition in so many varieties. classic. cage free.
and organic. only eggland's best. iraq, afghanistan and the fight against isis. all conflicts played important roles in president obama's eight years in the white house. as his time comes to a close, president obama sits down with our own jake tapper to discuss challenges faces u.s. military veterans and his ligsy legacy commander in chief. talking about this with seth molten, joining us. congressman, thank for joining us. you served four tours of duty in iraq. so you understand that place. first of all, the breaking news we're getting now that an additional 500 u.s. military troops are heading towards iraq. that's going to bring the number up to about 5,000. all u.s. troops arrived in a lot of fanfare end of 2011. this looks like a creeping escalation of u.s. military
involvement. are you concerned? >> i am concerned, and what we have to ask as americans is how will this time be different? under the same president who campaigned on getting us out of iraq we now have 5,000 troops going back in and the worst tragedy is we're refighting many of the same battles we already won. fallujah, ramadi, mosul up next. we've got to ask, how will this time be different? how can we ensure we win the war, not just the fight gueagai terrorists. >> and all going in as adviser. you understand, advisers, they're wearing boots and they're wearing bots on the ground. >> right. this is a combat mission. we were combat advisors, in 2004 we were on the front lines with these iraqis within the first couple of week, the worst fighting that the war had seen until that time, because the iraqis came under attack, they needed our support. we went to the their aid.
this absolutely is a combat mission. >> and thousands of other u.s. military personnel in neighbors kuwait who could easily move in as well. i'm sure when you went to iraq you went through kuwait? >> that's right. if the commanders on the ground need reinforcements, i'm sure the commander in chief will deliver them. you're right to be worried about this being a creeping mission. we really have to talk about what happens the day after? because our fight militarily against isis is actually going pretty well. they haven't gained territory in over a year. only have one stronghold left in iraq, the city of mosul, but what happens the day after we win? how do we ensure the peace so five years from today we don't find ourselves sending thousands of troops back to iraq yet again to clean up the mess when it falls apart. >> the u.s. had, what, almost 200,000 troops, got rid of saddam hussein. relatively easy, but the day after, as you point out, turned out to be almost a nightmare. >> the day after in 2003 was a real problem and we hadn't planned for it, but then we also
beat the insurgency. beat al qaeda in iraq during the surge. at that point, ambassador crocker and xbraen trgeneral pe were joined at the hip. defeat al qaeda, the terrorists to make a space for iraqi politics to succeed. then we didn't ensure the success of iraqi politics and when the iraqi government fell apart, isis swept in. so if we don't have a plan to ensure the peace, ensure the success of iraqi politics after we're done defeating isis on the ground, i think question find ourselves back there again. >> the problem as i see it, the u.s. can't want peace and stability in iraq more than the iraqi people themselves. and right now, just as they have been for a long time, deeply divided sunni, shia, kurd, and that's a problem and this iraqi government is a problem. al maliki, former prime minister is a problem. al abadi, is he better? >> a lot better, actually. he believes the right things, says the right things. we just need to help him do the
right things. in the same way we send our troops over to help mentor the military and soldiers on the ground and their fight against isis we need a diplomatic effort to help iraqi politicians. we did that during the surge and even under a terrible prime minister in prime minister mall malki, and then abandoned the effort. a diplomatic surge and pulled out and didn't do it and look at the mess now. >> you want hillary clinton to be the next president of the united states. are you comfortable with her flat assertion she will never have u.s. combat ground troops stationed in iraq or syria for that matter? >> i'm confident that in that assertion if we actually have a plan to maintain peace. >> to declare that, tell isis, enemy and others out there who hate the united states, don't worry. the u.s. is never going to send large numbers of combat troops into iraq or syria? >> she clarified that statement the next day and said she's very open to having special forces,
having small numbers of troops on the ground. bottom line is this -- we've got to have a political and diplomatic plan to ensure peace or we'll find ourselves in an unending cycle of going back again and again. >> the criticism she's gotten not just from donald trump and other republicans, even from fellow democrats, why say it publicly? why afterwards that to the end? >> she wants to make it clear we're going it make this time the last time, in iraq this time to win. and like that iraqi housewife said. she said we want to make sure that this time we win iraq and it doesn't fall apart again. >> you're a military veteran. you know, the president's going address these issues in a town hall that airs tonight. jake tapper moderating this town hall with u.s. military personnel, asking questions. what do you want to hear as a veteran tonight in this town hall? >> i want to hear about reforming the v.a. taking care of the troops when they get back home. trump talked about just privatizing the v.a.
veterans are against that. there are a lot of surveys and polls that show what they want is a v.a. that works. we need to talk about how to fix the v.a., how to reform the v.a. i think secretary clinton has a plan for that. trump just wants to blow it up. >> says he wants to help veterans in every speech. >> of course he says he wants to help the veterans. >> a top priority, helping the vets. >> right, he says that. just like he said he contributed to veterans charities and turns out he hadn't contribute the any at all, the rhetoric doesn't often match the reality. he doesn't often have a plan, just like a super secret plan to defeat isis. we all know he doesn't really have a eventually give $1 million. >> after the fact. he lied to a lot of veterans saying he supported them in the past, he hadn't. >> thanks for joining us. >> thanks, wolf. >> thanks for your service as well. >> thank you. be sure to watch our cnn presidential town hall event "america's military and the commander in chief." tonight 9:00 p.m. eastern, the
preparations are under way for the friday state funeral of the former israeli state president shimon peres. tributes and condolences are pouring in for a man who worked diligently for peace in the middle east. president obama said in a statement "there are few people who we share this world with who change the course of human history, not just through their role in human events but because they expand our moral imagination." former president bill clinton said in a joint statement with his wife hillary clinton, "israel has lost a leader who championed its security, prosperity and limitless possibilities from its birth to its last day on earth." and former british prime minister tony blair tweeted "shimon peres was a political giant, a statesman who will rank
as the foremost of this era or any era. someone i loved deeply." president obama we're told wants to attend the funeral in jerusalem on friday. they're working out the logistics according to the white house press secretary. among those definitely attending the funeral, former president bill clinton, the french president francois hollande and the prince of wales, prince charles. i interviewed shimon peres on several occasions over the years, including here in washington in 2011 at the united states institute of peace. he praised president obama's efforts to achieve an israeli/palestinian peace agreement. >> i applaud the president. i think he's serious. i think it's a dilemma that all of us is between following the values, the primacy of the moral choice and the realistic situation which is not
necessarily as small as we would like to be. he really think, like all of us, that the solution must result from an imposition and that's one of the reasons why i respect the president, i believe he's trying to do the right thing and careful not to create illusions and not to create something which is imaginary. so it's a different situation. it was different parties. and it's not a lost hope, neither is it an assured prosperity. we have to work very hard and very serious to make this possibility into a reality. and that should be the task of all of us. >> my last interview with shimon peres was in tel aviv two years ago as the war in gaza was winding down. he said he was 100% optimistic
an israeli/palestinian peace agreement eventually could be achieved. >> there is no real solution for the palestinians, for us without having a peace. i think the fight in the middle east today is more about the future that the past. the past is dead. >> until his final days, shimon peres worked hard for that elusive peace. he was a good man. he certainly will be missed. shimon peres was 93 years old. that's it for me, thanks for watching. the news continues right here on cnn right after a quick break.
hi, everyone, i'm poppy harlow. donald trump is on a swing state tour. he's in the midwest right now. michelle obama is stumping for hillary clinton in the key swing state of pennsylvania, this hour. but just moments from now hillary clinton will be live in durham, new hampshire, she's riding high off a strong debate performance. now she's targeting what polls show is a weak link in her support -- that is her appeal to young folks, millennials specifically. she's with her former democratic rival bernie sanders. they're going promote a